DEMOCRATS SCRAMBLE.....(SCANDAL)......FOR THE WHITE HOUSE - THE SUNDAY COMMENTARY
Remember the Mid Terms of last year ? There was much speculation from many sources that if the Democrats were to win the House and/or the Senate there would be a secession of endless investigations and hearings that would dominate Congress and bog down the legislative process. To this then Minority leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid quickly replied, "NO."
Just after the election and the results showing the the Democrats had won majority status in both the House and the Senate the speculation concerning endless hearings continued. This time in addition to Speaker to be Pelosi and Senate Majority leader to be Reid the scratchy voice of New York's Chuck Schumer chimed in to again cry, "NO," to the speculation.
It is now March and Democrats have been in the majority for nearly three months and we have been inundated with endless hearings with cries of more to come. The latest concerns the firing of eight federal prosecutors who as everyone knows serve at the discretion of the President and as has been reported by the Washington Post and the very liberal Los Angeles Times were fired AFTER extensive, ( nearly one year), review of the job performance of the eight.
I am not going to get into these hearings per say because those who are liberal and read this have already come to the conclusion that this was a huge Bush scandal which is yet another in a long line and nothing I write or state as factual evidence will convince you otherwise and that this is just another Demcorat witch hunt.
What I do intend to conclude here is based on a memory that came to mind concerning a memo written in 2003 that was leaked from the office of West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller on a Democrat strategy leading up to the 2004 Presidential election.
The memo which was issued to party and Senate Democrat leaders and members outlined a strategy that would use independent investigations to politicize Iraq intelligence and bend the truth a little leading up to the election as a means of harming the Bush administration before the election.
Now we are into another election cycle leading up to another Presidential election in 2008. This time the Democrats are the majority in Congress and no longer have to depend on, "independent investigations." As the majority it is their prerogative to hold hearings and investigations on any subject or scandal whether actual or perceived as they wish.
The current investigative hearings climate created by the Democrats seems to be following the strategy as outlined in the 2003 Rockefeller memo. Hearing after hearing continues on Capitol Hill investigating anything and everything that originates from the Bush White House.
Democrats are not nor ever have been exceptionally strong on discussing the issues. Sure they fleetingly mention them from time to time especially when campaigning and then only in a manner that is sure to provide a sound bite for the media. So what better way to manipulate the public into turning toward whomever gains the 2008 Democrat nomination but to use the Congressional Majority status and its power to investigate, creating scandal after scandal with the current Republican administration and place the idea of perceived corruption in the public eye with the eventual goal of gaining the White House.
I can see future headlines now. "PRESIDENT BUSH DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR GLOBAL WARMING"
Dateline Washington. In yet another scandal to rock the Bush White House Democrats in Congress are conducting investigations into possible intentional plans by the President to destroy the planet through global warming. Sources from within the White House have revealed that the President ordered broccoli to be a regular feature at all White House meals at both private and state functions.
Broccoli in its digestive form is scientifically proven to cause methane gas which is key to the creation of the , "Greenhouse effect, " that is causing the rising of global temperatures.
New York Senator Chuck Schumer stated, "the President is flagrantly using the executive power of the Presidency to create global climate change and it is our duty to investigate this and bring those involved to justice." Majority leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi released a joint statement calling for the President to, "cease in this immoral and deliberate attack on the environment."
Democrats are calling for the resignation of the White House Chef who has apoligized for the manner in which he cooked the broccoli.
While the above is a satirical reference to the Democrat's endless investigation and hearings agenda it is very reflective of the trivial nature of this entire process. The Democrats in a mad scramble to capture the White House are using the Congress as a means to create a scandal ridden climate and in the mean time consuming tax payers money and time for political gain while accomplishing nothing because there is nothing to accomplish!
With the current seemingly endless election cycle which finds one election over and the campaigning for the next beginning almost immediately is this the wave of the future ? Democrats historical thrive on scandal as a means of gaining political points with the electorate. Now that the run for the White House has already begun, their current hearings driven agenda makes it obvious that we are experiencing just the tip of the iceberg of the perceived scandals and investigating, hearings and scandal strategy of the Congressional leadership and their scramble to win the Presidency!
Ken Taylor
Just after the election and the results showing the the Democrats had won majority status in both the House and the Senate the speculation concerning endless hearings continued. This time in addition to Speaker to be Pelosi and Senate Majority leader to be Reid the scratchy voice of New York's Chuck Schumer chimed in to again cry, "NO," to the speculation.
It is now March and Democrats have been in the majority for nearly three months and we have been inundated with endless hearings with cries of more to come. The latest concerns the firing of eight federal prosecutors who as everyone knows serve at the discretion of the President and as has been reported by the Washington Post and the very liberal Los Angeles Times were fired AFTER extensive, ( nearly one year), review of the job performance of the eight.
I am not going to get into these hearings per say because those who are liberal and read this have already come to the conclusion that this was a huge Bush scandal which is yet another in a long line and nothing I write or state as factual evidence will convince you otherwise and that this is just another Demcorat witch hunt.
What I do intend to conclude here is based on a memory that came to mind concerning a memo written in 2003 that was leaked from the office of West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller on a Democrat strategy leading up to the 2004 Presidential election.
The memo which was issued to party and Senate Democrat leaders and members outlined a strategy that would use independent investigations to politicize Iraq intelligence and bend the truth a little leading up to the election as a means of harming the Bush administration before the election.
Now we are into another election cycle leading up to another Presidential election in 2008. This time the Democrats are the majority in Congress and no longer have to depend on, "independent investigations." As the majority it is their prerogative to hold hearings and investigations on any subject or scandal whether actual or perceived as they wish.
The current investigative hearings climate created by the Democrats seems to be following the strategy as outlined in the 2003 Rockefeller memo. Hearing after hearing continues on Capitol Hill investigating anything and everything that originates from the Bush White House.
Democrats are not nor ever have been exceptionally strong on discussing the issues. Sure they fleetingly mention them from time to time especially when campaigning and then only in a manner that is sure to provide a sound bite for the media. So what better way to manipulate the public into turning toward whomever gains the 2008 Democrat nomination but to use the Congressional Majority status and its power to investigate, creating scandal after scandal with the current Republican administration and place the idea of perceived corruption in the public eye with the eventual goal of gaining the White House.
I can see future headlines now. "PRESIDENT BUSH DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR GLOBAL WARMING"
Dateline Washington. In yet another scandal to rock the Bush White House Democrats in Congress are conducting investigations into possible intentional plans by the President to destroy the planet through global warming. Sources from within the White House have revealed that the President ordered broccoli to be a regular feature at all White House meals at both private and state functions.
Broccoli in its digestive form is scientifically proven to cause methane gas which is key to the creation of the , "Greenhouse effect, " that is causing the rising of global temperatures.
New York Senator Chuck Schumer stated, "the President is flagrantly using the executive power of the Presidency to create global climate change and it is our duty to investigate this and bring those involved to justice." Majority leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi released a joint statement calling for the President to, "cease in this immoral and deliberate attack on the environment."
Democrats are calling for the resignation of the White House Chef who has apoligized for the manner in which he cooked the broccoli.
While the above is a satirical reference to the Democrat's endless investigation and hearings agenda it is very reflective of the trivial nature of this entire process. The Democrats in a mad scramble to capture the White House are using the Congress as a means to create a scandal ridden climate and in the mean time consuming tax payers money and time for political gain while accomplishing nothing because there is nothing to accomplish!
With the current seemingly endless election cycle which finds one election over and the campaigning for the next beginning almost immediately is this the wave of the future ? Democrats historical thrive on scandal as a means of gaining political points with the electorate. Now that the run for the White House has already begun, their current hearings driven agenda makes it obvious that we are experiencing just the tip of the iceberg of the perceived scandals and investigating, hearings and scandal strategy of the Congressional leadership and their scramble to win the Presidency!
Ken Taylor
posted by The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth | 11:16 AM
21 Comments:
Outing of a covert CIA Agency by Bush Administration officials.
Walter Reed travesty.
Attempts to Lie and Cover-Up the political firings of U.S. Attorneys.
Use of the Patriot Act to justify not seeking Senate confirmation for replacement U.S. Attorneys.
FBI's admitted abuse of National Security Letters to gather information illegally about American citizens.
And that is just in the last two weeks!
I should be more clear - this is what Congress has been exploring in the last two weeks.
The concept that rightwingers fail to grasp, is one of accountability.
This is exactly what I predicted when the Democrats won control of the house. They will talk and talk and talk and talk, but do nothing.
We have nothing to fear from these pretenders.
Hearings and panels and discussions and calls for investigations, but no signifiant legislation.
Mark, agreed. It's frustrating though when the MSM plays these hearings as if they are gospel and that nothing but illegal activity is taking place. Never is there even any historical content or semblance of the truth concerning what in the hearings is truly based on law. Which is not much if any.
Rob, When will you get over this false notion that Plame was, "outed." Fitzgerald spent two years and millions of dollars trying to prove just that on his witch hunt and only came up with Libby forgetting what he said and never finding any thing illegal. She was not a covert agent at the time nor had been for more than six years. Everyone new it in Washington both in the administration and out whether GOP or Dem. This show last week was a Dem ploy to give her an avenue to continue the witch hunt for her civil trial and the opportunity to make money off of this lie.
It was well documented that Walter Reed problems extented back several years well before Bush and even. It came to light now because the out patient faciclities are being used more extensivly.
By the way the hiring and firing of federal attorneys is at the discretion of any President and Senate consent is NOT required. Remember Clinton fired ALL 93 at one time to cover helping out Dan Rostencouski(sp) who was under investigation at the time. Any dismissle of Fed prosecuters is politically motivated and this witch hunt by the Dems will prove nothing more that hearings for hearings sake.
Mudkitty, so now that the Dems are in charge thre is accountability. Sure, remember the massive corrunption for 40 years under Dems or has historical fact left you. Accountability does not mean holding hearings for political gain. There is not one ioda of evidence in any of this that shows any breach of law. THAT IS NOT ACCOUNTABILITY BUT POLITICS!
Sorry, there were incidents of corruption - but nothing like the massive, institutionalized, corruption we've had after only 12 years of a GOP majority. Virtually every one of your leaders had to resign in shame.
*****
Mark - if Dems aren't doing anything, as you claim, than what do you have to complain about? You can't have it both ways. In fact you are being disingenuous - the fact is that what ever the dems do, however innocuous, or weighty, you're not going to like it. You dead set on hating it; whatever dems do, or say, no matter how good it is for the country.
*****
KT - last I heard, lying to a grand jury and to the FBI IS a crime. So it's a lie to say a crime hasn't been committed. In fact, via a court of law, it has been established that a crime was committed by Scooter Libby, resulting in a conviction...of a crime.
As for Amritrage, Fleisher, Rove, etc. they made deals for immunity. Fleisher testified to that matter. The immunity deals with the underlying issue; that of revealing a covert operative's identity. Last I looked, that was a crime too.
Get real people, cuz if this is the best you've got, in terms of your thinking, in terms of ideas, than Republicans are going to be back in the political wilderness for another 40 years.
Ken we will see what comes out of the whole Plame affair now that it is actually being looked at by Congress, but you are greatly mistaken about her covert status.
Fitzgerald explicitly stated that she was.
Plame, under oath this week, explicitly stated that she was.
Current CIA Director Michael Hayden agreed this week that she was.
If you want to continue to believe the nonsense that she was not covert, that is up to you. But that assertion is not based on any fact.
Bush replaced all of Clinton's U.S. attorneys when he took office also - that happens every time there is a change in parties in the White House. But, that is not the issue. The issue is that the Bush Administration was selectively firing its own Republican U.S. Attorneys who were not playing politics the way the Administration wanted - not for performance reasons. That is why you have so many Republican Senators (e.g., Kyl, Ensign, Hagel, Spector, etc.) who are just as outraged about what was being done to good folks who were by all accounts doing a great job.
They can "admit" it all they want. The author of the law herself said that Plame's circumstances did not fall under the definition of "covert".
Those "republican" senators are RINOs. As far as I am concerned, they should change party.
The so-called author of the law is not the sole author, for one, and she's either admitting that she doesn't know what she's talking about, or that she wrote a law that is supposed to protect Covert CIA Agents, but is so filled with holes, that it doesn't do the thing it is supposed to do. Clearly Robert, you haven't seen her testimony, nor have you read any "analysis" that isn't GOP propoganda.
Oh Robert, I expected more from you. You want to parse words and try to use a strict definition of "covert" provided by a questionable witness to justify the leaks.
If you want to argue that the current DCI is too stupid to know what the definition of "covert" is, that is up to you. If you think he is that much of an idiot, you should be calling for the removal of Michael Hayden as DCI.
I am assuming you are referring to Victoria Toensing's testimony about the definition of "covert." I found Ms. Toensing's testimony to be a joke. She admitted she had no first-hand knowledge of the situation and/or what Plame was doing at the CIA.
But let's assume for a minute that Plame was not covert under the more strict definition under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. You are basing this assertion on Toensing claims - even though she admitted she does not have any first-hand knowledge of what Plame was doing. But let's bend reality to fit what Toensing claims. Even if we accept that Plame did not meet her interpretation of the definition of "covert," there is no question that the leak was in violation of the administrative rules under Executive Order 12958. After some hemming and hawing, even Toensing agreed that the leak was in violation of the Order. Watch it yourself (copy and paste the link):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_JBFlrZDeCA
So basically, your position - and that of Toensing - is that no CRIMINAL wrongdoing took place. However, that does not change the fact that the Administration violated the Executive Order and that our national security was compromised by the Bush Administration's efforts to discredit Joe Wilson.
Here is what Plame said under oath last week:
"In the run-up to the war with Iraq I worked in the counter proliferation division of the CIA -- still as a covert officer whose affiliation with the CIA was classified.
I raced to discover solid intelligence for senior policymakers on Iraq's presumed weapons of mass destruction programs.
While I helped to manage and run secret worldwide operations against this WMD target from CIA headquarters in Washington, I also traveled to foreign countries on secret missions to find vital intelligence."
Rob:
“Plame, under oath this week, explicitly stated that she was.”
- Actually for the most part she contended that she did not know, herself, what she was. Numerous times she said “I’m not a lawyer, I don’t know what I was classified as.” Now I don’t know why it would take a LAWYER to know what you job title and stipulations are… but it was not until NUMEROUS leading questions that she sided with saying she was “covert.”
Rob, Did Armitage support the war? Is he a close supporter of POTUS and VPOTUS? Uh-huh, and yet you want to make the Bush Administration accountable. Do you believe that Armitage should be charged as well?
MK:
“The concept that rightwingers fail to grasp, is one of accountability.”
- Right, just like New Orleans has been run by the left for years, but they always hold THEMSELVES accountable. Please. The problem with the left in charge now, is they hate the President… so they are going to do everything to make him accountable and the right accountable for everything under the sun. Just anything will work to muddy the waters in order to gain power.
MDC, I have no idea what you are talking about.
Plame's fourth sentence of her opening statement was:
"I served the United States loyally and to the best of my ability as a covert operations officer for the Central Intelligence Agency."
Her seventh sentence was:
"In the run-up to the war with Iraq I worked in the counter proliferation division of the CIA -- still as a covert officer whose affiliation with the CIA was classified."
The very first question after her opening statement was as follows:
"REP. JOHN YARMUTH (D-KY): . . . my understanding is that on that date (July 13, 2003 - the day Novak wrote his column), you were covert. Is that correct?
MS. PLAME WILSON: I was a covert officer, correct."
Sounds pretty clear to me. Please direct me in the transcript to where you think she was unclear about her covert status.
Are you in Robert's camp and think that the current DCI is too stupid to know what "covert" means? He reviewed and approved Waxman's opening statement and his use of the term "covert" with respect to Plame.
Just a quick note to MDCOnservative - good to see you back. I hope you are either recovered or well on the way to recovery from your accident!
It seems that rightwingers STILL don't know what IS IS.
Rob puts up a nice list of phony scandals.
Investigating them will take time away from the real and pressing issues which affect the lives of every single American.
But nutball Democrats like Schumer and the moonbats you have chirping here haven't had a good idea for how to address ANY of those issues other than just making noise.
I could chop through that list and show where Democrats have been hypocritical on each.
But where would that get us?
We know they have no ideas, nothing but negativity and bile.
P.S. Maybe we should bring the Dems up on charges of lying to the American people about these investigations. If they can convict Scooter Libby for forgetting what he had for breakfast three years ago I don't see why not.
Right...according to rightwingers, when the Dems breathe it's a scandal, when the republicans steal and lie, it's buisness.
No, when a President takes an oath to tell the truth and then lies, it is perjury and a scandal.
When the Presidential administration exercises lawful authority, accompanied by decades of precedent, that is business.
That leaves Bush out...
Mike, let me again correct you. The Dems didn't convict Libby. He was found guilty by a JURY in Federal Court. The prosecutor was U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald who was nominated by former Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois (they are not related). Patrick Fitzgerald was confirmed by the Republican Senate.
You can call my list "phony scandals," but we will just have to disagree. Personally, I don't see any excuse for outing a covert CIA agent when we are at war. The issues at Walter Reed directly impact our returning troops - but, I guess you don't really care about the troops. I could go on, but figure that your only response will be to call me names and pout.
To a republican, a court of law is a show court in any case.
Ken Taylor:
A quote form your bolg:
"based on a memory that came to mind concerning a memo written in 2003 ,"
At least on liberal blogs a link to the actual document is provided, here all we have is "based on a memory...." your blog is laughable.
Post a Comment
<< Home